Although there are so many to chose from let me highlight five of the most asinine types of Christian arguments I’ve seen:

1) "You were never Christians."

This comes from Calvinists who think only real Christians will persevere and be in heaven. We've addressed this till the cows come home. Just look at our responses in our FAQ sheet. See especially my particular response. The problem with this claim is that the ones making it cannot do so based on what they believe. For all they know we really were/are Christians, saved in Jesus with our names written in the Lamb's book of life. It's just that right now we're backsliding. They have no idea whether or not we'll return to the fold before we die. But the bottom line is that we did in fact believe the gospel just as Christians now do. God never kept his promise to save us even though we believed.

The whole problem with using this repeatedly as an argument is that it does nothing to change the mind of a person who doesn't have such a religious experience. It's one thing to believe because of a religious experience, which can be had by people who have different and even contradictory ideas as a result of the same experience. But it's another thing entirely to argue that because you had such an experience I should believe. This is not only asinine, it's very annoying. You can believe because of whatever experiences you have had. But when you attempt to engage people who claim not to have had these experiences (or that they were not veridical) you must meet us on common ground. You must argue on behalf of what you believe with reason. When it comes to these religious experiences you must argue that yours are veridical and that others who claim them are not. This means you must provide a philosophical argument, not antecdotal evidence.

3) “You don’t understand what true Christianity is all about.”

People making this claim think we’ve chosen an easy target when we debunk evangelical Christianity, and that Christianity is much different than that. Some of the most ignorant ones making this claim think that if we only understood true Christanity we would become believers (lol). I’ve seen this argued by existentialists, liberals, Catholics and other believers normally thought of as part of a "cult" by mainstream Christians.

Here is my usual response to these believers. Christianity is “a many splendored thing.” Like a chameleon it changes with the times and adapts to specific geographical locations (how evolutionary of it!). How can we debunk something that has these moving goals posts? We can't. So, we’ve chosen to debunk conservative, evangelical, or “Biblical” Christianity. It has the most obnoxious presence in politics and on the web. One former team member put is this way:

Not only is fundamentalist Christianity the greatest threat in the United States to science, tolerance, and social progress, but it is also the most prevalent form of Protestant Christianity to be found in our nation, whether you like it or not. It is the fundamentalist religious right that holds the reigns of the Republican party (which currently controls the nation, in case you didn't realize), and it is this same fundamentalist religious right that lobbies for the teaching of lies in public school and fights against funding for embryonic research that could potentially save the lives of millions.

Whether you like it or not, it is this flavor of Christianity that makes the loudest, most obnoxious, most dangerous impact on the world today, giving us plenty of good reason to direct the brunt of our attacks in its vicinity.

If you’re a liberal, existential or Catholic believer then we just might share some of the same criticisms of that which we take aim at, so join us in this goal, just like James McGrath does from time to time. Otherwise, start a Blog titled “True Christianity,” and invite all professing Christians there to hammer out your differences. If you can come to a consensus then come back here and we’ll debunk that consensus (lol). But don’t be so ignorant as to do that here. We know the differences. We just target a specific kind of Christianity because that’s the only way to be effective in debunking any of them. And don’t kid yourself, either. There are some aspects to our debunking that debunk all religions and all Christianities. Many of the beliefs we debunk are affirmed in the Apostles, Nicene and Athanasian creeds. So to you I say, if the shoe fits, wear it; if not, then don’t.

4) “Merely quoting the Bible shows that we are wrong.”

These people I call the “Bible Thumpers." They are responding to our arguments with the very evidence we are questioning. A believer simply cannot reasonably respond to an argument that the Bible is unreliable by quoting from the Bible. If you don’t accept what I say about this then listen to Christian professor Dr. Dan Lambert, who told his students how to respond to the arguments in my book in these words: "You cannot use the Bible to try to refute his points or to support your own. You must use logic and critical thinking primarily." Here's the Link